4 ms·

"Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized" that is always the argument against freedom of speech. There is nothing new there. I think the trolls, s

by JackFr 5y ago

"Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized" that is always the argument against freedom of speech. There is nothing new there. I think the trolls, shills and agitators are a symptom of dysfunction rather than the cause. And I think the idea that more authoritarian states are stronger/more stable/better because they don't suffer this is deeply misguided. In the United States, our political class is deeply and fundamentally unserious. Our legislators seem uninterest in legislating and in general seem to believe that their main job is re-election, and not the work they were elected to do.

OrvalWintermute 5y ago
> Our legislators seem uninterest in legislating and in general seem to believe that their main job is re-election, and not the work they were elected to do. Going to attempt a fix Our legislators seem uninterest in legislating and in general seem to believe that their main job is re-education, and not the work they were elected to do.
- amanaplanacanal 5y ago
  At least in the US we do seem to be electing a lot of folks who appear to be grifters riding on the mob, rather than statesmen with any kind of coherent political philosophy or policy suggestions. It wouldn’t surprise me that this is just the extension of social media into government. It’s getting hard for me to see anything good coming out of social media.
mschuster91 5y ago
> "Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized" that is always the argument against freedom of speech. There is nothing new there. To quote chief Nazi propagandist Goebbels from 1928: We enter the Reichstag to arm ourselves with democracy’s weapons. If democracy is foolish enough to give us free railway passes and salaries, that is its problem… We are coming neither as friends or neutrals. We come as enemies! As the wolf attacks the sheep, so come we. The modern-day far right is following exactly the same almost-100-years-old playbook, and there are still people who don't recognize that we are letting history repeat itself. What would your (great-)grandparents have thought if you told them that there would be open marches of swastika flag-bearing people in the US?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- amanaplanacanal 5y ago
  In our great grandparents day they wore pointed hoods instead, but I don’t see much difference.
- adventured 5y ago
  > What would your (great-)grandparents have thought if you told them that there would be open marches of swastika flag-bearing people in the US? That happened to a far greater degree in the 1930s. There is nothing comparable today. Formal, large, organized groups representing literal fascism and communism were present in the US back then. Those great-grandparents were certainly aware of it. The US is a large and diverse nation - formed of the world's peoples in many regards - and you're allowed to follow almost any ideology you choose. That means extreme, violent statist-type elements - socialist, fascist, communist, theocratic, et al. - will never cease to be present. "When Nazis Took Manhattan" https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2019/02/20/695941323/when-nazis-took-manhattan https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2019/02/20/695941323... "American Nazis in the 1930s—The German American Bund" https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/06/american-nazis-in-the-1930sthe-german-american-bund/529185/ https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/06/american-nazis-in-...
SuoDuanDao 5y ago
>I think the trolls, shills and agitators are a symptom of dysfunction rather than the cause. And I think the idea that more authoritarian states are stronger/more stable/better because they don't suffer this is deeply misguided. Not to put too fine a point on it, but if 'the west' has a coherent set of moral principles at all they are probably inextricable with the idea that more authoritarian states are more brittle/more stagnant/worse. Even if it's true that free speech is being used against 'the West', turning our back on it in response would mean there's nothing there to defend.
IIsi50MHz 5y ago
> "Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized" that is always the argument against freedom of speech. There is nothing new there. Indeed, "Let them eat cake." is the most famous thing Marie Antoinette never said, judging by the various anonymous and pseudonymous pamphlets and other printings that popularised during her time that and many other slanderous or otherwise hurtful remarks. (( And no, I'm not saying a police state or anarchy would be an appropriate outcome. ))

by JackFr 5y ago

OrvalWintermute 5y ago

> Our legislators seem uninterest in legislating and in general seem to believe that their main job is re-election, and not the work they were elected to do. Going to attempt a fix Our legislators seem uninterest in legislating and in general seem to believe that their main job is re-education, and not the work they were elected to do.

amanaplanacanal 5y ago
At least in the US we do seem to be electing a lot of folks who appear to be grifters riding on the mob, rather than statesmen with any kind of coherent political philosophy or policy suggestions. It wouldn’t surprise me that this is just the extension of social media into government. It’s getting hard for me to see anything good coming out of social media.

mschuster91 5y ago

> "Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized" that is always the argument against freedom of speech. There is nothing new there. To quote chief Nazi propagandist Goebbels from 1928: We enter the Reichstag to arm ourselves with democracy’s weapons. If democracy is foolish enough to give us free railway passes and salaries, that is its problem… We are coming neither as friends or neutrals. We come as enemies! As the wolf attacks the sheep, so come we. The modern-day far right is following exactly the same almost-100-years-old playbook, and there are still people who don't recognize that we are letting history repeat itself. What would your (great-)grandparents have thought if you told them that there would be open marches of swastika flag-bearing people in the US?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
amanaplanacanal 5y ago
In our great grandparents day they wore pointed hoods instead, but I don’t see much difference.
adventured 5y ago
> What would your (great-)grandparents have thought if you told them that there would be open marches of swastika flag-bearing people in the US? That happened to a far greater degree in the 1930s. There is nothing comparable today. Formal, large, organized groups representing literal fascism and communism were present in the US back then. Those great-grandparents were certainly aware of it. The US is a large and diverse nation - formed of the world's peoples in many regards - and you're allowed to follow almost any ideology you choose. That means extreme, violent statist-type elements - socialist, fascist, communist, theocratic, et al. - will never cease to be present. "When Nazis Took Manhattan" https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2019/02/20/695941323/when-nazis-took-manhattan https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2019/02/20/695941323... "American Nazis in the 1930s—The German American Bund" https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/06/american-nazis-in-the-1930sthe-german-american-bund/529185/ https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/06/american-nazis-in-...

SuoDuanDao 5y ago

>I think the trolls, shills and agitators are a symptom of dysfunction rather than the cause. And I think the idea that more authoritarian states are stronger/more stable/better because they don't suffer this is deeply misguided. Not to put too fine a point on it, but if 'the west' has a coherent set of moral principles at all they are probably inextricable with the idea that more authoritarian states are more brittle/more stagnant/worse. Even if it's true that free speech is being used against 'the West', turning our back on it in response would mean there's nothing there to defend.

IIsi50MHz 5y ago

> "Freedom of speech and anonymity is being weaponized" that is always the argument against freedom of speech. There is nothing new there. Indeed, "Let them eat cake." is the most famous thing Marie Antoinette never said, judging by the various anonymous and pseudonymous pamphlets and other printings that popularised during her time that and many other slanderous or otherwise hurtful remarks. (( And no, I'm not saying a police state or anarchy would be an appropriate outcome. ))